Tolls Worse Than Taxes! (And Taxes Ain't Good)

Congratulations Freedom Fighters!! Big Victory in Texas.

2009-11-12T18:56:00.001-08:00

Reposted from July, 2009.

Wow, after many years, we have scored a tremendous victory to stop CDA's and PPP's! They will probably try again in 2011, but they will be having to dig out of the deepest hole ever.

A big Texas thank you to every one that made the efforts along the way!

And a separate huge thank you to Sal Costello, without his body of work, this victory may very likely have never occurred!

Here is the press release from texasturf.org

IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Contact: Hank Gilbert, Board Member, Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom (TURF), President of Piney Woods Subregional Planning Commission (903) 570-3613, WEB: http://www.texasturf.org/
Grassroots defeat GOLIATH: Stop the sale of TX roads to foreign corporations, protect public pension funds
(Austin, TX – July 2, 2009) Today, ordinary Texans brought Governor Rick Perry’s road privatization, toll road, and Trans Texas Corridor agenda to a screeching halt. The Legislature adjourned without re-authorizing private toll road contracts called Comprehensive Development Agreements (or CDAs). The grassroots scored another victory by KILLING the revolving fund in HB 1, preventing the $2 billion in bonds from being spent to build toll roads, convert freeways to toll roads, or subsidize private toll deals, as well as protecting public employee pension funds from risky toll roads schemes that are failing all over the world.
“It is a hard-fought victory for the grassroots. We killed Goliath, not just Perry’s controversial toll road policies, but we defeated a sold out Senate and the BIG MONEY, the lobbyists, who sank millions into pushing for the sale of Texas highways,” Hank Gilbert, Texas TURF Board member and President of Piney Woods Subregional Planning Commission.
“We applaud Rep. David Leibowitz, once again, for standing up for Texas taxpayers and leading the charge to fix the bill that created a revolving fund that would have raided teacher retirement and public employee pension funds for risky toll road schemes. He authored the bill to KILL the Trans Texas Corridor and another to prevent the conversion of freeways to tollways during the regular session. He’s a proven taxpayer hero and Texans owe him a tremendous debt of gratitude,” said TURF Founder, Terri Hall.
“However, no session is without a few villains. CDA proponents and senate leaders like John Carona and Steve Ogden need to be taken to the woodshed for promising to promote the MOST expensive method of road funding, CDAs, next session, and for wanting to continue to raid public pension funds over the LOUD objections of Texans. None of this is dead in their minds, just postponed until they can resurrect this controversial public fleecing for another day,” Hall emphasized.
Taxpayers wanted Perry’s controversial and virtually universally detested road privatization schemes to die a natural death August 31 as scheduled, which will also KILL the mechanism to build the Trans Texas Corridor (or TTC). Today, they achieved just that. However, TTC-69/I-69 was excepted out of the moratorium, SB 792, in 2007, so TxDOT has the authority to enter into CDAs for that project through 2011. TURF, in cooperation with two private property rights foundations (Stewards of the Range and American Land Foundation) and local governments, have been instrumental in forming subregional planning commissions in the path of TTC-69, and plan to use these commissions to challenge the TTC and keep it from ever being built.

Giant Toll Road Battle in Texas Special Session!

2009-07-01T17:01:00.000-07:00

Stay tuned to this blog for critical current updates!

Critical Dallas Morning News article about SH 121 financial debacle:
http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/latestnews/stories/061709dnmethighways_.45b7a42.html

Keep up with HB 3:
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/History.aspx?LegSess=811&Bill=HB3

Keep up with HB 4:
http://www.capitol.state.tx.us/BillLookup/History.aspx?LegSess=811&Bill=HB4

Please call your Texas State House of Representative Member:
http://www.fyi.legis.state.tx.us/

Key members to try to swing are located in Tarrant, Dallas, Denton and Collin County. Call your friends in these areas and ask them to contact their reps!

Following Districts Include parts of SH121 (toll and non-toll)

Representative Myra Crownover District 64
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist64/crownover.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/64.pdf
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Burt Solomons District 65
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist65/solomons.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist65/solomons.php
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Ken Paxton District 70
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist70/paxton.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/70.pdf
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Jodie Laubenberg District 89
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist89/laubenberg.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/89.pdf
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Brian McCall District 66
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist66/mccall.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/66.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Vicki Truitt District 98
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist98/truitt.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/98.pdf
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Marc Veasey District 95
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist95/veasey.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/95.pdf
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Lon Burnam District 90
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist90/burnam.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/90.pdf
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Kelly Hancock District 91
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist91/hancock.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/91.pdf
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Todd Smith District 92
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist92/smith.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/92.pdf
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Jim Jackson District 115 **and 635**
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist115/jackson.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/115.pdf
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Larry Phillips District 62
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist62/phillips.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/62.pdf

Constituents affected by SH121 (adjacent or very near)

Representative Tan Parker District 63 Northern and Western Denton County
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist63/parker.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/63.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Jerry Madden District 67
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist67/madden.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/67.pdf
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Charlie Geren District 99
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist99/geren.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/99.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Mark Shelton District 97
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist97/shelton.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/97.pdf
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Chris Turner District 96
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist96/turner.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/96.pdf
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Paula Pierson District 93
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist93/pierson.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/93.pdf
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Diane Patrick District 94
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist94/patrick.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/94.pdf
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Carol Kent
District 102 **635**
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist102/kent.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/102.pdf
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Angie Chen Button District 112 **US75**
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist112/button.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/112.pdf
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Joe Driver District 113
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist113/driver.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/113.pdf
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Linda Harper-Brown District 105 **635**
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist105/harper-brown.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/105.pdf
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Rafael Anchía District 103 **635**
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist103/anchia.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/103.pdf
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Will Hartnett District 114 **635**
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist114/hartnett.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/114.pdf
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Allen Vaught District 107 **635**
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist107/vaught.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/107.pdf
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Robert Miklos District 101 **635**
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist101/miklos.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/101.pdf
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Kirk England District 106
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist106/england.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/106.pdf
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Roberto Alonzo District 104
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist104/alonzo.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/104.pdf
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Terri Hodge District 100
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist100/hodge.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/100.pdf
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Dan Branch District 108 **US75**
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist108/branch.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/108.pdf
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Yvonne Davis District 111
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist111/davis.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/111.pdf
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Barbara Mallory Caraway District 110
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist110/mallory.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/110.pdf
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Representative Helen Giddings District 109
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/dist109/giddings.php
http://www.house.state.tx.us/members/pdf/districts/109.pdf

Web link for District Info:
http://www.tlc.state.tx.us/redist/pdf/h1369/map.pdf

Please Contact Texas Senators About Eminent Domain Bill HJR 14

2009-05-18T14:14:00.000-07:00

Here's the following from our friend Linda Curtis:

Linda Curtis
Independent Texans
http://IndyTexans.org
ljcurtis@IndyTexans.org
PO Box 14294
Austin, TX 78761
512-535-0989 home office
512-383-8484 Austin office
512-657-2089 cell

What NOW?

* Call to ACTION & Tools to ACT
* Important FACTS for you on the Eminent Domain Constitutional Amendment & the Eminent Domain Bill.

The Senate will vote soon on HJR 14 (the Amendment). Make the CONTACT as soon as possible.

* 1. CALL (Fax or Email) your State Senators and tell them you support HJR 14. (House Joint Resolution 14)
* 2. Forward this message to your friends and family to encourage them to do the same.

The Contact TOOLS you need are at the very bottom.

FACTS: the Constitutional Amendment (to take action on)
This message is from the Institute for Justice, the public interest law firm that represented Suzette KELO in her fight to keep her home which resulted in the U.S. Supreme Court KELO decision in favor of taking private property from individuals and giving it to others for economic development purposes.

HJR 14 is the constitutional amendment to put better protection against Eminent Domain abuse into the Texas Constitution. It has passed the House unanimously. If the Senate passes

HJR 14 with a two-thirds majority, it will appear on the November ballot so that we can vote FOR more protection of private property.

Thousands of Texans, from Houston to San Antonio to El Paso, are currently on the chopping block. They need your help. Now, more than ever, it is critical that you make your voice heard and support HJR 14. This is it. It's been four years since the Kelo decision. The future of property rights in Texas rests in the hands of the Texas Senate. We have to let them know how important stopping eminent domain for private gain is to Texans.
Thank you for continuing to stand on the frontlines of the battle against eminent domain abuse.
Christina Walsh
Institute for Justice

FACTS: the Bill (This underscores why we need BOTH to protect us.)
May 14, 2009
My San Antonio Editorial
by Bill Peacock http://www.mysanantonio.com/opinion/Texas_needs_real_property_rights_protection.html Bill Peacock works for the Texas Public Policy Foundation, an Austin-based nonprofit, free-market research institute. "Land-owners need rights in a development-driven world."

Texas needs real property rights protection

Four years have passed since the U.S. Supreme Court's infamous Kelo decision, which essentially changed private property ownership from a fundamental civil right to a privilege granted by the state at its sole discretion.

Texas has failed to adequately respond to this decision. The first attempt in 2005 missed the mark. In 2007, the Legislature passed strong property rights protections in HB 2006, but the bill was vetoed over concerns about compensation.

Senate Bill 18 is this legislative session's Eminent Domain Reform Bill. However, it was recently stripped in the Senate State Affairs Committee of two key reforms. Today, there is a good chance that after the Legislature adjourns, Texas property owners will still be subject to the same takings that outraged the nation in the Kelo case.

The cities that exercise the power of eminent domain — and have consistently opposed reform — are generally of the same opinion.

One analysis of SB 18 concluded:

SB 18 attempts to strike a reasonable balance between the needs of condemners and the property rights of landowners and appears to make more subtle changes in an effort to promote fairness for property owners.

The provisions of SB 18, in its current form, might make the use of eminent domain more complicated, and nominally more expensive. But the bill is not nearly as bad as virtually every other alternative.

In other words, SB 18 allows cities to carry on their eminent domain business as usual.

One of the major protections stripped from SB 18 was a definition of public use. The justification offered in support of this was that “public use is already defined in case law.” While it is true that the courts have determined over the years what constitutes a public use, this is a cause for action — not inaction — by the Texas Legislature.

Kelo exposed years of jurisprudence that has undermined the Texas Constitution's standard that property may be taken only for a public use. As the Texas Supreme Court has noted, our courts have “adopted a rather liberal view as to what is or is not a public use.”

This liberal view allows property to be taken from one property owner and given to another in order to increase tax revenues for local governments. SB 18 defers to the judicial blessing on these takings and does nothing to stop them.

Fixing Texas' KELO problem involves three things:

* 1. eliminating the ability of governments to transfer taken property from one private owner to another,
* 2. eliminating the ability of governments to use blight designations as an end run around the ban on takings for economic development purposes, and
* 3. ending government land speculation by requiring that property not put to the public use for which it was taken within five years, be offered for sale back to the original owner at the price the government paid for it.

The Texas Legislature needs to pass, and Gov. Rick Perry needs to sign, legislation containing these reforms. To date, SB 18 contains none of them. Only with these reforms will Texans be assured that cities like El Paso, with its downtown redevelopment plan already in place, won't use eminent domain to achieve the dreams of the well-connected at the expense of the rest of us.

Texas Senator Contact Info:

TOOLS: LINK to ALL Senators & ALL their Contact INFO.: http://www.senate.state.tx.us/75r/senate/Members.htm

TX SENATE Members - 81st Legislative Session

Averitt, Kip (512) 463-0122 & Fax: (512) 475-3729 Kip.Averitt@Senate.State.Tx.US
Carona, John (512) 463-0116 & Fax: (512) 463-3135 John.Carona@Senate.State.Tx.US
Davis, Wendy (512) 463-0110 & Fax: (512) 475-3745 Wendy.Davis@Senate.State.Tx.US
Deuell, Bob (512) 463-0102 & Fax: (512) 463-7202 Bob.Deuell@Senate.State.Tx.US
Duncan, Robert (512) 463-0128 & Fax: (512) 463-2424 Robert.Duncan@Senate.State.Tx.US
Ellis, Rodney (512) 463-0113 & Fax: (512) 463-0006 Rodney.Ellis@Senate.State.Tx.US
Eltife, Kevin (512) 463-0101 & Fax: (512) 475-3751 Kevin.Eltife@Senate.State.Tx.US
Estes, Craig (512) 463-0130 & Fax: (512) 463-8874 Craig.Estes@Senate.State.Tx.US
Fraser, Troy (512) 463-0124 & Fax: (325) 676-8060 Troy.Fraser@Senate.State.Tx.US
Gallegos, Mario, Jr. (512) 463-0106 & Fax: (512) 463-0346 Mario.Gallegos@Senate.State.Tx.US
Harris, Chris (512) 463-0109 & Fax: (512) 463-7003 Chris.Harris@Senate.State.Tx.US
Hegar, Glenn (512) 463-0118 & Fax: (512) 475-3736 Glenn.Hegar@Senate.State.Tx.US
Hinojosa, Juan "Chuy" (512) 463-0120 & Fax: (512) 463-0229 Juan.Hinojosa@Senate.State.Tx.US
Huffman, Joan (512) 463-0117 & Fax: (512) 463-0639 Joan.Huffman@Senate.State.Tx.US
Jackson, Mike (512) 463-0111 & Fax: (512) 475-3727 Mike.Jackson@Senate.State.Tx.US
Lucio, Eddie, Jr. (956) 968-9927 & Fax: (956) 447-0583 Eddie.Lucio@Senate.State.Tx.US
Nelson, Jane (512) 463-0112 & Fax: (512) 463-0923 Jane.Nelson@Senate.State.Tx.US
Nichols, Robert (512) 463-0103 & Fax: (903) 589-0203 Robert.Nichols@Senate.State.Tx.US
Ogden, Steve (512) 463-0105 & Fax: (512) 463-5713 Steve.Ogden@Senate.State.Tx.US
Patrick, Dan (512) 463-0107 & Fax: (512) 463-8810 Dan.Patrick@Senate.State.Tx.US
Seliger, Kel (512) 463-0131 & Fax: (512) 475-3733 Kel.Seliger@Senate.State.Tx.US
Shapiro, Florence (512) 463-0108 & Fax: (512) 463-7579 Florence.Shapiro@Senate.State.Tx.US
Shapleigh, Eliot (512) 463-0129 & Fax: (915) 544-1998 Eliot.Shapleigh@Senate.State.Tx.US
Uresti, Carlos (512) 463-0119 & Fax: (512) 463-1017 Carlos.Uresti@Senate.State.Tx.US
Van de Putte, Leticia (512) 463-0126 & Fax: (512) 463-2114 Leticia.VandePutte@Senate.State.Tx.US
Watson, Kirk (512) 463-0114 & Fax: (512) 463-5949 Kirk.Watson@Senate.State.Tx.US
Wentworth, Jeff (512) 463-0125 & Fax: (512) 463-7794 Jeff.Wentworth@Senate.State.Tx.US
West, Royce (512) 463-0123 & Fax: (512) 463-0299 Royce.West@Senate.State.Tx.US
Whitmire, John (512) 463-0115 & Fax: (713) 864-5287 John.Whitmire@Senate.State.Tx.US
Williams, Tommy (512) 463-0104 & Fax: (512) 463-6373 Tommy.Williams@Senate.State.Tx.US
Zaffirini, Judith (512) 463-0121 & Fax: (956) 722-8586 Judith.Zaffirini@Senate.State.Tx.US

Take Action Today to Save US290 East!

2009-03-23T18:01:00.000-07:00

Please send in your comments!

--- On Sun, 3/22/09, Susan Ridgway Garry wrote:

From: Susan Ridgway Garry
Subject: ACRE: Injustice to use stimulus funds to begin 290 E toll road
To: susan_garry@hotmail.com
Date: Sunday, March 22, 2009, 6:50 PM

ACRE:
If you don’t want YOUR stimulus funds used to TOLL YOU on 290 E, submit comments now!

To: ACRE group

March 22, 2009

Dear Friends:

On March 19, a Select Committee of the Texas House of Representatives heard testimony on whether certain transportation projects are suitable to receive Federal stimulus funds. This message will cover the 290 East toll road situation.

Thanks to Mary Anderson and Bruce Burton of Texans Against Tolls; Roger Baker, transportation analyst; Vince May, Elgin resident who has been active on this issue; and Mel Borel of TURF for testifying AGAINST using the stimulus funds to begin turning 290 East into a toll road.

You can send in your comments against using our stimulus funds to begin the process of tolling us on 290 East. Whatever your thoughts on whether there should be the stimulus fund program or not, I think that most of us can agree that if funds are going to be spent anyway, they should not be spent to force us to pay more money to drive to work on 290 E. Especially galling is that one of the priorities of the stimulus funds is to help economically disadvantaged areas. Using the funds to begin tolling the residents east of Austin will hurt an economically disadvantaged area.

You can email comments to the Select Committee Clerk at valerie.pizana@house.state.tx.us

Representative Jim Dunnam is the Chairman of the Select Committee, and you can email comments to his Chief of Staff at jenny.casey@house.state.tx.us

You can mail your comments to:

The Honorable Jim Dunnam

Chairman, Federal Economic Stabilization Funding Select Committee

Texas House of Representatives

P.O. Box 2910

Austin, TX 78768-2910

The Select Committee’s phone is 512-463-0240.

The Federal government has a website where you can leave comments if you think the stimulus funds are being misused—recovery.gov.

The comment form is here:

http://www.recovery.gov/?q=content/contact

The site says: “The job of the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board is to make sure that Recovery.gov fulfills its mandate—to help citizens track the spending of funds allocated by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The Board consists of Inspectors General from about ten major cabinet agencies—including the Departments of Justice, Treasury, and Commerce—and one of its duties will be to review the comments and questions submitted to the site. Though the Board has not yet met, please feel free to submit your comments and questions below, and they will be gathered to present to the Board upon its first meeting.”

FYI—Here is the letter that I have emailed to the above offices: valerie.pizana@house.state.tx.us, jenny.casey@house.state.tx.us, and http://www.recovery.gov/?q=content/contact.

Dear _____:

I watched the March 19 committee hearing online and would like to submit some comments to the Committee. I’m especially concerned about using stimulus funds that are supposed to help the economically disadvantaged to begin a toll project that will punish the surrounding economically disadvantaged residents.

I am referring to the 290 E/183 flyovers. I am familiar with the situation because we live northeast of Manor and often drive to Austin on 290 E. As reported, the CTRMA will get $90 million of stimulus money for this project. These flyovers are the west end of what they are calling the “Manor Expressway,” which will be tolled. Eventually, the tollway will run from these flyovers on the west to past the SH 130 toll road on the east—five or six miles. Then, in future years, tolling possibly will continue toward the east through Manor and on out 290 E toward or to Elgin.

The Eastern Travis County/Manor area is a lower income area with many residents who have no disposable income to PAY EXTRA just to commute to work. I think that using stimulus funds to begin this toll project is just the OPPOSITE of what is intended. The federal government has asked to use the funds to HELP the economically disadvantaged. Using stimulus funds to begin the 290 E tollway will HURT the economically disadvantaged.

Turning the FREE lanes on 290 E into TOLL lanes is NOT NEEDED either for increasing traffic demand or for safety. You heard from Roger Baker, who has done much research over the years into transportation projects. I hope he provided you with written information, but to quote him briefly, “Recent improvements to US 183 and also SH 130 have both REDUCED TRAVEL DEMAND on SH 290 E. The official TxDOT traffic counts thus indicate a DECRASING need to build this $623 million toll road in order to solve identifiable congestion problems.”

Regarding traffic safety, Roger reported about the data he received from TxDOT for the sections where they would build the 290 E toll road, “This knocks the props out from under the CTRMA/CAMPO theory that justifies rebuilding 290 E as a $623 million toll road in order to resolve worsening safety problems. You have to go back to 2003 to find a year as safe as 2008. As the traffic counts have gone down and travel has diverted to SH 130 and 183, the need for a 290 E toll road has DECREASED—in terms of both volumes and safety.”

2003—57 total crashes

2004—87

2005—103

2006—117

2007—95

2008—78

I hope that your Committee will do whatever is in its power to try to stop this injustice that is about to be perpetrated on the people who happen to live on the east side of Austin through a program that is supposed to be helping them. Indeed, I believe that using these Federal funds for an economically unjust purpose would violate Title VI that is supposed to prohibit such things.

Sincerely,

Susan Garry

For continuing coverage, see the ACRE blog

http://acretexas.blogspot.com/

This is a volunteer email list. Please let me know if you’d like to be removed. Thanks, Susan

Suggestions and Solutions to:Traffic Congestion, I-35 Congestion, and Highway Financing. All Without Tolls, Without The TTC and Without CDA's

2007-03-08T17:47:00.000-08:00

Dear Senate Committee on Transportation and Homeland Security,

I wish to enter my comments regarding toll policy, Public Private Partnerships and the Trans-Texas Corridor.

Previously delivered oral testimony and now written.

Name: Richard Reeves
Representing: Hardworking Texas Taxpayers and myself
Title: N/A
Street: P.O. Box 152541
City: Austin State: Texas Zip: 78715-2541
Phone: 512-673-7360 Email: luckpresser at yahoo.com

I hereby certify that the above and following statements by me are true and accurate, and that the testimony I give before this body will be true and accurate.

Attest: Richard Reeves March 8, 2007

Dear Senate Committee on Transportation and Homeland Security,

Suggestions and Solutions to:
Traffic Congestion
I-35 Congestion
Highway Financing

Without:
the Trans-Texas Corridor
tolls on any existing or new roads
or CDA's

Table of Contents

Introduction

Part 1: Why Toll Roads Are a Poor Answer to Reducing Congestion

Part 2: Possible Solutions to I-35 Traffic Congestion Without the

TTC and/or Other Toll Roads

Part 3: Solutions and Suggestions on How to Fund New Roads and

Road Improvements

Introduction

Greetings, my name is Richard Reeves and I've been a professional driver for nearly 30 years. For approximately 20 years I drove large commercial vehicles, about 10 years regional and local, about 10 years over the road(OTR). During my time as an OTR driver, I covered all 48 of the contiguous states and parts of Canada. During the last 9 years, my miles have been behind the wheel of Taxicabs in Dallas/Ft.Worth, Austin, and San Antonio.

Over the past two years, because of concern about the SH130, the TTC and Phase 2 toll projects in the central Texas area, I've become an even more serious student about one of the key tools of my trade.....the roads.

In fact during the last year and a half, I've actually had a cable TV access program whose main topics of concern are toll roads, transportation, the TTC, etc. At first I thought it would be impossible to find sufficient news on the topic to be worthy of a weekly show. Boy, was I wrong! The news is sometimes so bountiful that I can't even cover it all.

Not only have I studied toll roads in the U.S., but Canada and several foreign countries as well.

By the way, the above mentioned years of driving equates to approximately 120 years of the miles that an "average" Texas driver would cover. During my time as a professional truck driver I dodged more toll roads than I ever took. And my colleagues did as well.

While I don't consider myself to be an "expert " on roads, nonetheless I'm a very serious student and I believe contained within this testimony you will discover points that are rarely, if ever, brought to light.

Part 1: Why Toll Roads Are a Poor Answer to Reducing Congestion

First of all, a very common characteristic of tolls roads is that they have ULTRA-LIMITED access and crossovers and/or crossunders that are too far apart thereby creating the perfect storm for bottlenecks at each and every intersection of the highway. Example (A good U.S. road map would be handy): Take a look at an urban toll road, I-294 in the Chicago, IL area. Insufficient local access, both ingress and egress, unnecessarily reduces utility of the road to the local traffic and thereby primarily serving regional and through traffic. The road is then underutilized by local traffic not just because of the toll aspect, but also because of a shortage of access. In the future, even if tolls are removed, the lack of access will still hamper traffic...especially the local, short distance travelers. On top of that, since the access is too limited and the crossings insufficient, local traffic has to travel greater distances on secondary arterials unnecessarily just to get to the aforementioned.

Now let's look at Orlando, FL. Almost all of the limited access highways in Orlando are toll roads. So, if we are to believe that toll roads are the answer to congestion, then Orlando must be one of the least congested cities in the country, right? WRONG!

In fact, Orlando ranks as the 28Th largest metropolitan area (per 2004 census) in the U.S. but according to the Texas Transportation Institute study called "The 2005 Urban Mobility Report" Orlando ranks disproportionately high, tied at 9Th worst in Annual Hours of Delay Per Traveler (55 hours).

Meanwhile, Cleveland,OH, which is the 23rd largest metropolitan area (per 2004 census), ranks 73rd in Annual Hours of Delay Per Traveler with only 10 hours! The Cleveland metro area has NO toll roads and, in fact, many, many travelers choose to drive through Cleveland, OH to avoid the tolls on the Ohio Turnpike. I personally did this more times than I can remember.

While we're on the subject of the Ohio Turnpike, it has been reported that on just ONE (U.S.20) of several alternate routes, there are 3 times the number of trucks per hour than are on the Ohio Turnpike. On just one! The state of Ohio has had to respond by lowering truck tolls and raising the speed limit, but I still doubt that they have gained much truck traffic.

Closer to home, let's look at Houston. Some make the claim that toll roads have solved Houston's traffic problems. The Houston Metro Area ranks 7Th largest (per 2004 census) and ranks 5Th worst in Annual Hours of Delay Per Traveler with 63 hours (same 2005 TTI Study). The way I see it, prior to toll roads, Houston was like a person being strangled whilst held under water, now with toll roads Houston is still strangled, but at least they aren't held underwater as well. Houston.....you have a problem!

Now, let's look at Austin, TX. Austin ranks 38Th in population (per 2004 census), but is disproportionately high in Annual Hours of Delay Per Traveler ranking 13Th worst with 51 hours (same 2005 TTI Study). However, this circumstance does not exist due to toll roads (yet), the reasons for Austin's dire straits are due to a simple lack of freeway miles and significantly due to a lack of a viable bypass or an alternate route for I-35. The CAMPO board and CTRMA had an independent study done by Charles River Associates, Inc.(CRAI). The CRAI study echoes my assertions of Austin's traffic woes.

Sadly, with SH130 scheduled to open as a toll road and being a longer through route, Austin's traffic dilemma seems unlikely to end any time soon.

As another example of drivers avoiding the toll roads, please refer to a Friday, Jan. 12, 2007 story in the Statesman: "Tollway Use Falls". In this article it was reported that as cash customers had run out of the free trial run period on portions of SH45 and SH130 that daily transactions fell by 48 to 60%.

In the Dallas area, now that SH121 is being converted to tolls, look for more traffic to divert to US 380, US 82 and I-635 (yikes). I'm sure the north Dallas area along I-635 will appreciate the additional traffic.

As far as managed lanes go, SR91 in California is the poster child for what can go wrong. Orange County, CA agreed to a Public Private Partnership along with the non-compete clauses attached. Over the years the traffic increased creating gridlock on the free lanes and high prices on the managed lanes. Orange County wanted to add lanes and/or build alternates but were thwarted by the non-compete clauses. Ultimately, Orange County had to buy out the Private Party at a huge premium over what it would have cost to build the new lanes originally. Orange County still suffers due to that mistake to this day.

I can cite many more examples such as the ETR407 in Toronto, New Jersey Turnpike, Pennsylvania Turnpike, and London and Singapore congestion pricing schemes.

In short, I've yet to find any location in the world where toll roads have "solved" congestion. Toll roads merely shift congestion to other roads leaving the toll road under utilized.

Part 2: Possible Solutions to I-35 Traffic Congestion Without the TTC And/Or
Other Toll Roads

First off, get out a good Texas road map.

I-35 traffic should be able to be largely alleviated by making improvements primarily to existing roads such as the following: US 59, US 79, SH 31,SH 34, expansions of I-35 in certain areas and removing tolls from SH 130, SH 45 (north and south).

Currently, much of the NAFTA truck traffic out of Laredo, TX goes to destinations east of I-35. Therefore, if trucks and other drivers have other good limited access freeway routes to I-20 and I-30, the drivers would gladly divert to get away from I-35. The same routes would be utilized on the way back to Laredo. Also, I-69 should be developed and built as a freeway.

It appears that there is a plan to create a mega-port in Lazaro Cardenas, Mexico. Work with shippers and transportation companies to not over divert inbound containers away from west, east and gulf of Mexico US ports of entry. Try to distribute inbound containers close to their final destinations. Right now it looks like the plan is to force feed containers and freight through Texas that may well terminate on the east or west coasts. If this occurs, it will unnecessarily drive traffic through Texas and be wasteful to boot.

Inbound traffic that is destined west of I-35 can be rerouted through Del Rio, TX. Improve US 277 and others to move traffic to points north and west.

Part 3: Solutions and Suggestions on How to Fund New Roads and Road
improvements

A: According to CAMPO (Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization), constructing a road as a toll road adds 20 to 30% to the cost. That can make for a significant realized savings. Add to that, the fact that we keep learning that many of these roads that are supposedly funded by the future tolls or by a Private Partner are actually hugely funded by current tax dollars. During the public hearing on March 1, 2007, one individual claimed that the George H.W. Bush tollway north of Dallas had been tax funded to the tune of $850 million!

Is this true?

The same individual stated the some or all of the interchange costs had been borne by other cities and towns. How much of a shortfall did they claim to have to justify tolling the road? Would the savings garnered by building the road as a freeway have been enough to get the project built or mostly built?

It has been reported that SH 130 in central Texas has been partially funded by the city of Austin to the tune of at least $67 million. How much other tax funding has been rolled into the SH130 project?

Yet, despite the large investment by Austin, Austinites and other travelers will suffer the I-35 mess because the tolls on SH 130 will discourage a higher level of utilization SH 130.

B: By canceling the TTC, inflation of construction costs should diminish or drop due to less anticipated demand on raw materials, equipment, etc.

C: During the 2006 Texas elections we kept hearing about a $12 to $15 billion surplus, if we have no money then why is that and where is it?

D: Despite the fact that Texas has more miles of US, Interstate, State Highways, etc., Texas has for many decades been a donor state. For many, many years the people of Texas have sent a dollar to the Fed Gov and only gotten back 80 cents. Over the years, this has added up to billions and billions of dollars diverted away to states with many less miles of roads to build. This fact combined with the fact that the NAFTA agreement implemented by the Feds has overwhelmed I-35 with a great deal of additional through traffic makes it time that the Fed Gov make Texas a priority and fully or partially fund many if not most major road projects.

E: It is my understanding that many governments, IE, state, county, city and others maintain Comprehensive Annual Financial Reports aka CAFR's. It has been reported that these CAFR's are treated as a complete separate set of books and that the principal, earnings and interest on the CAFR's accounts for huge incomes annually to the respective controlling governmental body. To date, no one has ever disputed the existence of the CAFR's. By all accounts the CAFR's amount to billions of dollars. It is time that the State of Texas, Texas cities, counties and others utilize these huge assets to build some roads and other needed projects. The money belongs to Texans!

To learn more about CAFR's go to http://www.cafr1.com/. Be sure and look up the CAFR's for cities, counties, municipal districts, utility districts, and of course the State of Texas.

F: Why is it that to-date, over 98% of all the roads in Texas have been built through traditional funding sources such as the gas tax and other related taxes? Why is it that TXDOT officials, the Texas Transportation Commission and many others keep repeating the theme that Texas has no money to build new roads and that our population has grown and will continue to grow, yet these same entities NEVER point out that along with the population growth there has been an accompanying growth of tax revenues of every sort including gas tax revenues. In all of the transportation related hearings and meetings I've attended, I don't recall ever hearing an official cite or acknowledge this fact.

Case in point, according to the Texas Comptroller, Susan Combs, the Texas Net Revenue by Source in 1978 was $8.3 billion. In 1986 that number had grown to $17.8 billion, 1996 was $40.4 billion, and finally the latest 2006 numbers stated a whopping $72.4 billion!

I'm old enough that I had a job with a beer distributor in Ft.Worth,TX during the late 70's. The job paid in the neighborhood of $30K to $35K. That same job today might pay $50k tops. That's a far cry from the near 9 fold increase in revenues at the state level. And that is just at the state level. What about all the other levels of government that have had similar levels of increased revenues? When are our tax dollars going to be properly allocated and accounted?

G: Personally, after citing the above, I don't believe that the following is necessary, but hey what the heck.

As I'm sure many of you know, the Texas Transportation Institute reported in December that the current so-called highway funding crisis could be solved by an immediate 8 cent per gallon gas tax increase and CPI indexing thereafter. In view of the fact that during the public hearing held by Senator Carona on March 1, 2007, we repeatedly heard from many different sources that Public-Private Partnerships also known as Comprehensive Development Agreements here in Texas are the MOST EXPENSIVE option to get Texas roads built. We just don't need the added expense, the added bureaucracy, and an entity that would actively work to thwart solutions to traffic congestion because it may cut into their revenues and/or profits!

H: Lastly, the Federal Government seems to have no qualms about borrowing (for any or no reason) from the Federal Reserve to the tune of supposed trillions of dollars. The Federal Reserve doesn't seem to mind the arrangement too much after all they print the money from paper, ink and thin air, then loan it to us and collect massive piles of interest on virtually nothing. The Fed Gov has spent billions and even trillions and gotten less to show for it than at least investing in the roads.

Sincerely,

Attest: Richard Reeves

P. O. Box 152541

Austin, TX 78715-2541

512-673-7360

Do Your Best Carl Sagan and Say "Texas Cheated Out of Billions and Billions For Roads"

2006-01-27T07:19:00.000-08:00

Where does all the gas tax money go? Oh sure, over the years cars and trucks fuel mileage figures have improved somewhat. The big 18 wheelers have improved from the 60's and 70's when they achieved 4 or 5 miles per gallon to 7 to 10 depending on a myriad of factors. But overall, we hear every year that the number of barrels of oil the U. S. uses just keeps growing and growing. The overall amount of fuel tax collected keeps growing, and just think of all of the related taxes you pay just involved in car ownership. You pretty much don't even need to do a "Google" search to know we've got more cars and trucks paying more taxes than ever before. So now we must ask, "Where does all the other transportation related tax money go?
Then you can ask, if Texas puts in a dollar of gas tax to the Feds and only receives back .80 for the previous 40 years until 2002. Where did all those .20s go? By the way those .20s have added up to "billions and billions" of lost road money for Texas. Texas road dollars have gone to states like NY and PA where guess what? Toll roads! Toll bridges! And (gasp) rail! Picture me looking like Redd Foxx as Fred G. Sanford on "Sanford and Son" saying "This is the big one! You hear that, Elizabeth? I'm coming to join ya, honey!"
Anyway, here's a pair of great articles by Ron D. Utt, Ph.D illustrating the shortchanging of Texas as well as other states and shining the light on the beneficiaries.
http://www.heritage.org/Research/SmartGrowth/wm645.cfm
http://www.heritage.org/Research/SmartGrowth/em938.cfm

Solve Congestion? BUNK! It's About REVENUE!

2006-01-23T12:35:00.000-08:00

Key quote:
•The state would be limited in building other controlled access highways within 10 miles of the Toll Road.
http://www.fortwayne.com/mld/fortwayne/13652383.htm

Toller Near Monopoly Causes Trucks to Pay $30 to Cross a Bridge

2006-01-20T19:29:00.000-08:00

Tollers won't admit it, but congestion relief is far from a primary goal. It's about revenue and finding just the right choke points to cash in big time. A prime example is the George Washington Bridge(GWB) which crosses the Hudson River between New Jersey and Manhattan.
As of this writing 5 axle trucks, one of the most common configurations for 18 wheelers,are charged $6 per axle. A whopping $30 to cross a bridge built in1931! It is a one way toll and discounts can be had, but for most over-the-road(OTR) drivers there's no guarantee they'll use the GWB on the way out of Manhattan and discounts add a level of hassle factor and wasted time to take advantage. And by the way, during my time as an OTR driver, plenty of time was spent in congestion trying to get across the infamous GWB.
Where in the world does all that toll money go?
Where are the alternate routes built with all that toll money?
Excerpt: "For instance, it costs $30 cash to cross the George Washington Bridge into New York City, any time of the day."
http://www.heavydutytrucking.com/2005/04/042a0504.asp

$600 Million For Ineffective Rail, But SH130 Must Be A Toll Road!

2006-01-20T13:23:00.000-08:00

Last year CAMPO announced that the Feds have $600 million for a new passenger rail system between Austin and San Antonio. The system would be called the Austin-San Antonio Intermunicipal Commuter Rail District and would only move 4 to 5% the traffic that I-35 moves on a daily basis. The SH 130 project is approximately 80 miles long and using a per lane mile cost of $2 million works out to approximately $640 million for a 4 lane highway. Why don't our Texas representatives at every level insist on the rail money being put to better use by building SH130 as a FREEway. SH130 as a FREEway would finally bring much needed relief to the Austin area, but as a toll road will probably be of little help to Austin. Hmm, there IS money for rail but NOT for roads.
Also, note what the following report says about cost over-runs which could likely put the price tag of the rail system over (say it out loud) $1 BILLION!!
http://www.publicpurpose.com/ut-crinam.pdf

Taxpayers and Bondholders Beware of the Toll Road Bandits!

2006-01-20T12:45:00.000-08:00

Excerpts of particular interest:
"New toll roads have been a bonanza for consultants, but not for bondholders."
"But with revenues coming in at 45% less than the forecasts, Osceola County is ultimately on the hook for millions of dollars to cover the shortfall. "No one would have entered this transaction were it not for URS," says C. Ray Maxwell, director of planning and finance for Reedy Creek."
Complete story here: http://www.forbes.com/forbes/2001/0903/046_print.html

Taxpayers Pay EXTRA For Toll Road Shortfalls

2006-01-20T10:31:00.000-08:00

Some of the latest news coming out of Austin, proposed toll road capital of Texas, is about the Phase 2 Toll Road Independent (Sham) Review. In the fall of 2005, the CAMPO (Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization) Board responded to the public's outcry demanding an Independent Review of the Phase 2 toll roads by voting to create an Independent Review Board complete with an outside "objective" consultant. For some time, information about the membership of the review committee, the times, dates and locations of meetings and even the identity of the so-called "objective" consultant seemed to require a "Top Secret" clearance. However, this week on the 18th, the reasons for secrecy became painfully evident. As if one of the Co-Chairman of this panel being a proponent of house bill #3588 was not bad enough, it has now been discovered that the Central Texas Regional Mobility Authority has hired an outfit called URS to provide data for the Independent Review. Among URS past debacle involvements are SR 91 in California and The Camino Colombia toll road in Laredo, TX. and just click on to see the taxpayers being desanguinated in Florida: http://www.sptimes.com/News/071600/State/Flawed_figures_leave_.shtml

CAMPO Study Admits 130 Won't Serve Primarily as I-35 Bypass

2006-01-16T13:54:00.000-08:00

For months many folks have pointed out that Hwy 130 built as a toll road would seriously reduce its' use as a much needed bypass for Austin. However, I-35 travelers, including many Austinites will still get to enjoy paying gas taxes (some of which will go to help pay for so-called "private" toll roads) whilst sitting in bumper to bumper traffic. To add to the pleasure, Hwy 130 will sit underutilized and 130 users will get to pay tolls and continue paying gas taxes and just wonder where all the money goes!
Even CAMPO admits that the primary users of 130 will be local traffic, and you can bet that 130's users will only be there as a last resort.
Here's the study:
http://img.coxnewsweb.com/C/00/16/84/image_1384160.gif